Summations Only

What kind of punk-man are you? How do you think households without guns manage this situation?

Yup, they're going to sneak round behind dad's back. Teenage girls are already adept at that (or so I hear ).

That surely must be the case. That teen pregnancy Map Dr. Adequate posted suggests that states with lots of guns also tend to have lots of teen moms.

Teenage pregnancy, people getting shot, and the U.S./Mexican border. The same political party that is illegal immigrant friendly, blames hardware (guns) for the increased violence illegal immigration causes. Imagine that. Seems to be quite a dilemma for my opponents in this thread, since there have been no direct comments thus far about my link detailing the police shooting of an unarmed 19 year old girl.

They have many uses; threatening out-of-control-horny teenage boys, threatening violent criminals, mercifully killing rabid animals in heavily populated areas, the list is long. I never said that. I want teenage boys to be aware that a spur of the moment passion of a girls father could cause them to get shot if they don't think twice about having their way with her.

Or if they don't think twice about dropping by to play a game of backgammon.Kids are already afraid of getting caught by parents. The reaction to that fear is to make arrangements not to get caught.Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

Is the gun industry wrong to do this, if the U.S. government is one of its most enthusiastic customers? At about the 2:50 mark, it said this will "revolutionize law enforcement capabilities".When referring to the "gun happy U.S." as many seem to in gun control discussions, it's important to realize that so much gun interest is within the U.S. government.

And? Who is advocating for law enforcement to have more lethal weapons? Not me.

Including the U.S. government. U.S. morals are declining. It's not the fault of the private ownership of guns. I realize that in gun control debates, England is always perfect. I just get the feeling that the U.S. does a few things better than England does. The U.S. covers so much more land area, climate differences, diversity in its population, etc. - the two countries aren't even comparable concerning most issues.

You have a firm opinion on the gun control debate and have never seen that evidence? You must have formed an opinion without much research.More Guns, Less Crime - WikipediaNot Found - CSMonitor.com.http://www.unitedliberty.org/...rearms-are-a-crime-deterrent I remember hearing years ago that the New York City police force has more firepower than the entire Canadian military. As I said, the U.S. government loves its guns, and cares nothing about gun control for itself - it's not going to happen. Could be. The U.S. government doesn't seem to have much respect or trust for its citizens anymore. Edited by marc9000, : No reason given.

It doesn't matter who "advocates" any thing about guns concerning what the U.S. government has. The police, the Dept of Homeland Security, the EPA, they will have all the guns they want.

The NYPD has tanks, fighter jets, warships?

I had always supposed the South Carolina, for example, and Tennessee, were not all that close to the Mexican border. Maybe you should analyse the figures using a methodology other than jerking your knee.Shall we have a look at another map? We're still waiting for you to decide whether you're for it or against it.Your ramblings about the "dilemma" it poses your opponents are cryptic to those of us who have the good fortune not to live in your head. Perhaps you could expand on this bizarre fantasy; or perhaps you will on maturer reflection discover that you would look slightly less stupid if you kept it to yourself.Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.

So what's your argument. The police have lots of guns, so ...

Last time I checked, gun nuts could still vote.The significant issue is still how to reduce gun deaths.--Percy